Please describe your concerns with this comment. If you simply wish to respond to the comment please use the Comment Box on the story itself:
Hmm. Do Guernsey service providers know the background of all those nominee directors that are supposed to be controlling the various financial structures using Guernsey based products, say from out of Mauritius or Dubai. There seems to be many legal and professional providers operating from out of places such as BVI and Cayman that have offices here. How does the public know that the 'dodgy' (read normal practicing) providers in those places are not using the 'friendly' connections to open up the web of structures needed to hide funds from the authorities. Tax fiddling or criminality, the people that want to use these products can and do. It doesn't matter how many bits of paper Guernsey is seen to sign, the fact is that CDD and its equivalents will fail when confronted by known introducers and the already hidden beneficiaries looking for business here. In fact, the more 'white listed' we appear, the more likely the 'dodgy' providers will attempt to pass funds through here, legitimising that aspect of an 'investments' path around the world. It is only until there is full disclosure of ownership that any jurisdiction will be able to make the call that it is dealing as it should, and not facilitating crime. There's no point pretending otherwise. The facts continue to pile up. I was saying this stuff years ago and widely ridiculed. Even the likes of Terry Langlois didn't believe the structures I was describing, as highlighted everywhere in the media now.